4 ms·
Wittgenstein wasn't around when a president used Twitter to both control the media and get elected. Maybe news could rely on first principles approach. Quantif
by debt 10y ago
Wittgenstein wasn't around when a president used Twitter to both control the media and get elected.
Maybe news could rely on first principles approach. Quantify things like political stability, information availability, cultural problems, etc. and maybe apply a first principles approach and maybe an algorithm could tell use what the hell is going on at any given moment and maybe give us some insight into what may go on in the future as well.
I would assume intelligence agencies have something similar to the above. The problem is things happen in realtime and if a regime falls or a state fails or whatever, we have to adjust our models immediately.
Throwing out hands up and saying Wittgenstein solved it seems lazy but idk.
- dwaltrip 10y ago> Quantify things like political stability, information availability, cultural problems, etc Good luck. It's a worthy goal, but we are very far away from being able to do this in a rigorous fashion. There is a reason academia has the distinctions of "hard science", "soft science", and "not science". Cultural and political dynamics, by their inherent nature, might never be objectively quantified.
- tokenizer 10y agoGood luck, sounds absolutely insane and unworkable. AI needs "Truth" inputs. I imagine if we had this tool when George W invaded Iraq, this AI would have said Weapons Existed, being all the CIA, and Politicians said so. Isn't that how your filter works? Anti alternative media, pro establishment?
- willstrafach 10y ago> being all the CIA, and Politicians said so. This comes up often and is untrue. The Intelligence Community did not have confidence in the WMD claim. Good read regarding this: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/05/12/selective-intelligence/amp?client=safari http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/05/12/selective-intel...